Unitary Violence

The most curious question about humanity is not why people can somehow unite into groups of millions but yet still have deadly conflicts between groups - it is why people cannot unite into groups of millions without deadly conflicts between groups.

Perils Of Being Moderate

It's common shorthand these days, especially for mainstream new agencies, to label people who don't have strong opinions as "moderates".

I think this is a misnomer that confuses the vast majority of the people who are simply apathetic and don't care either way, with individuals who have deeply considered the topic and genuinely hold a moderate stand.

And the way that "moderate" is used also gives a false impression of safety - I mean, if a person holds such a reasonable stand, embraced by the majority and buffered away from all those "extremists" in society, who would ever want to attack her?

A good question.















On the 7th of April, Chinese Paralympic fencer Jin Jing (金晶), who was one of the Olympic torchbearers during the relay in Paris, was attacked by pro-Tibet protestors attempting to wrestle the torch away from her.

Her steadfast protection of the Olympic torch against the unruly demonstrators initially turned her into a celebrated hero in China. In addition, many Chinese citizens were enraged by the incident and blamed the French government for allowing it to happen.

As the sentiments continued to rise, numerous Chinese citizens decided to boycott the French retailer Carrefour as a show of anger towards France.

Jin Jing appealed to the crowds to be prudent in handling calls to boycott Carrefour. She felt that the first victims of such a boycott are likely to be the many Chinese employees at Carrefour.

This is a clearly a moderate stand, coming from the victim of the attack herself.

The response?

Many Chinese netizens immediately called her a traitor and launched a barrage of personal insults at her. The respect and admiration for her quickly transformed into frenzied rage against her.

Jin Jing is not the only person to be facing fierce attacks for her moderate stand. Grace Wang (Wang Qianyuan 王千源), a student at Duke University who tried to encourage dialogue between pro-Tibet protesters and pro-China protestors, was also branded as a traitor.

Her predicament is even worse - she needs police protection at Duke, and her family in China had to go into hiding because they received death threats.

It's not easy to be a moderate, because you can end up being shot by both sides.

Sometimes the most vicious attacks may actually come from "your side".

There are many tragic examples in history.

On 4th November 1995, Yitzhak Rabin, the first native-born Prime Minister of Israel, was assassinated.

He was shot, not by a Palestinian, but by a right-wing Orthodox Jew.

Rabin had been deeply involved in the Middle East peace process, resulting in the Oslo Accords in 1993. For his efforts, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1994.

However, many right-wing Israelis considered him to be a traitor for giving away land that rightfully belongs to Israel. The Oslo Accords caused deep divisions in Israeli society, ultimately culminating in the fatal shooting.

Prominent individuals often get singled out as targets for extremists of both sides, but sometimes there is no safety in numbers.

Even a large group of people can become victims.

During the Rwandan Genocide of 1994, Hutu militia groups planned a large-scale murder of the Tutsi minority in their country. However, the first people to be targeted in the mass killings were in fact a number of moderate Hutu politicians.

Members of their "own side".

They were silenced because they could help stem the fever pitch of anti-Tutsi sentiments that had rapidly escalated in Rwanda. Without their voices of reason, the Hutu militia could then play up the pent-up emotions of huge crowds of Hutus and incite them to violence.

Thousands of Hutus, along with about 800,000 Tutsis, perished during the genocide.

So you can see that being "moderate" is not some lazy, default state that people lapse into when they don't give a shit about anything.

I would argue that very few people have the courage to maintain a moderate stand when huge adversarial groups of people face off against each other. When you are neither "us" nor "them", you become "them" to both sides. Dichotomies, even false dichotomies, have immense social power.

Much easier to adopt an extreme stand and enjoy the absolute solidarity and power that it provides.

There aren't many genuine moderates in society, but without them, peace is very difficult to achieve.

Photos of Spaceship Earth

NASA's Crew Earth Observations Team has a collection of photos of the Earth taken from the International Space Station.

They have recently released their Top Ten photos, complete with text descriptions and audio commentaries.













Check them out, they're puurrrdy!

Ex-patriot

A very strange letter to the Straits Times today, so bizarre that it is most likely some form of satire:

Can Singaporeans be as patriotic?

I COULD not help but feel the patriotism of Chinese citizens here in China as many marched in protest against recent foreign intervention in events leading up to the Beijing Olympics.

News reports showed many Chinese taking up flags and protesting against foreign outlets, especially the French superstore Carrefour, in response to the aborted torch relay in Paris.

But the protests were peaceful and non-confrontational. I could feel the protestors' nationalistic fervour.

Their patriotism puts me to shame. I feel that I would never take to the streets to protect and honour my country's name at the risk of my own personal safety. What if there was a riot and I was trampled to death? There are too many risks involved in taking part in a demonstration.

The moments when I do feel patriotic are during National Day when the President stands to attention as our national anthem is being sung.

I fear that many Singaporeans will leave the country if there really is an impending confrontation with another country.

Will we stand up and defend Singapore? Do we fear for our own personal safety and that of our families and flee the country at the first whiff of danger?

The feeling I get from the Chinese here is that they are willing to die to defend their country.

We have much to learn from them.

Gilbert Goh
Hubei, China

A straight reading of this letter indicates that Mr. Goh is impressed with the nationalistic spirit displayed by Chinese protesters and hopes that Singaporeans will learn from them.

However, there are two main clues suggesting that there is a satirical twist in this letter.

First, check out this paragraph:

Their patriotism puts me to shame. I feel that I would never take to the streets to protect and honour my country's name at the risk of my own personal safety. What if there was a riot and I was trampled to death? There are too many risks involved in taking part in a demonstration.

Odd.

Why would anyone's display of patriotism put someone else to "shame"? To take one example, Singaporean supporters of sports teams also show strong displays of national pride complete with flags and loud cheering during international events.

Perhaps Mr. Goh believes that patriotism is some kind of dickfight where the country with the most impressive display, the most supporters, biggest flags and loudest cheering becomes the winner. Then the other countries can only lower their heads in "shame".

Also, since Mr. Goh admits that he will never take part in a street demonstration, citing "risks" to his personal safety, how can he turn around and question the courage of other Singaporeans? He seems to be expecting others to do what he would personally never do.

Which bring us this to the second clue:

I fear that many Singaporeans will leave the country if there really is an impending confrontation with another country. Will we stand up and defend Singapore? Do we fear for our own personal safety and that of our families and flee the country at the first whiff of danger?

Note that Mr. Goh is now based in Hubei, China, which means that he himself has left Singapore. Perhaps he smelt a whiff of danger?

It is extremely unlikely that someone would have so little introspective ability to miss the hypocrisy of this stand.

It is extremely extremely unlikely that someone could believe that a person who left his own country suddenly has the moral high ground to teach patriotism to Singaporeans who stayed in Singapore trying to make things better.

More likely Mr. Goh has crafted his letter as a satirical device lampooning Singaporeans who are too timid to take a stand, always waiting for somebody else to take the initiative, and always complaining that nothing ever changes while not personally willing to make any changes.

So my short response to his letter (in an equally satirical, jokey vein):

Fuck you.

You think that just because you are now making peanuts by quitting to China means you can use your elite uncaring face to teach us how to eat mee siam mai hum then brush it aside and say just move on because what to do it happened you better show accountability and not be complacent by explaining what you mean or else we'll fix you when you come back.

Lim Peh,

Lim Leng Hiong
Singapore

Seven Rolls Of Toilet Paper

On the 27th of February, Mas Selamat Kastari, a leader of the terrorist group Jemaah Islamiah (JI), escaped from the Whitley Road Detention Centre. The full report of this incident was presented by Deputy Prime Minister and Home Affairs Minister Mr. Wong Kan Seng in Parliament yesterday.

You can click the links below for more details about the report:

His window of opportunity (Today Online)

DPM gives full account of Mas Selamat's escape (Straits Times)

The report focused on the human and physical lapses that gave Mas Selamat the opportunity to escape. DPM Wong said that he was shocked and disappointed when first informed of this and added that "all the more when the mistakes have turned out to be so simple as to appear silly and incredible."

As a science blog, Fresh Brainz will not go into the social and political aspects of this news. There are mainstream media sources and numerous socio-political blogs that will discuss those issues at length.

Instead, we would like to examine one mysterious detail about the escape process.

This.

















Huh?!??

What's so special about a toilet paper roll?

A pack of seven toilet paper rolls was discovered on the ground outside the toilet window that Mas Selamat escaped from.

It is thought that the toilet paper pack was used to break his landing when he let go of the water pipe outside the toilet.

That is quite plausible; however, it raises two curious questions.

Why was Mas Selamat carrying a large pack of toilet paper on his way to a family visit? Note that he was blindfolded before being led to the Family Visitation Block.

If the packet was already present in the toilet, why was it placed in a urinal cubicle? Observe that there are only urinals in that part of the toilet, no sitting or squating WC at all (click here to view the timeline, photo of the urinal cubicle and schematic of the toilet floorplan) .

Rather odd for a blindfolded person to hang on to a large pack of toilet paper, and then carry it into a urinal cubicle while being completely unnoticed by the guards.

Fresh Brainz speculates that the pack of toilet paper might have been thrown outside the toilet at an earlier time - not only to break the escapee's fall, but as a method to test the level of survelliance outside the toilet.

Whether that is possible or not, the overall escape process demonstrates Mas Selamat's incredible determination and ingenuity, and underscores the importance of finding him soon.